Olympic Games Study Commission · Olympic Games Study Commission- Report to the 115th IOC Session 5 Report to the 115th IOC Session Wide consultation:The Olympic Games is the biggest

Olympic Games Study Commission

Report to the 115th IOC SessionPrague, July 2003

BY Richard W. Pound, Q.C.Chairman

© IOC 2003All Rights Reserved

Olympic Games Study CommissionReport to the 115th IOC Session

Prague, July 2003

Richard W. Pound, Q.C.Chairman

1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

2 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

3 Preliminary Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83.1 Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .83.2 The Focus of the Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

4 Considerations for Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .144.1 Begin at the Beginning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .144.2 IOC Evaluation Commissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .154.3 IOC Coordination Commissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .174.4 Progress Made to Date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

5 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .215.1 Games Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .225.2 Venues and Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .235.3 Games Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .275.4 Number of Accredited Persons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .325.5 Service Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33

6 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38

7 Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39

8 Annexes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42

© IOC 2003All Rights Reserved

“It would be very unfortunate, if theoften exaggerated expenses incurredfor the most recent Olympiads, asizeable part of which representedthe construction of permanentbuildings, which were moreoverunnecessary - temporary structureswould fully suffice, and the onlyconsequence is to then encourageuse of these permanent buildings byincreasing the number of occasionsto draw in the crowds - it would bevery unfortunate if these expenseswere to deter (small) countries fromputting themselves forward to hostthe Olympic Games in the future.”

Pierre de Coubertin, Olympic review, April 1911, pp 59-62

>

The Olympic Games Study Commission (the Commission) was established by IOC President

Jacques Rogge to analyze the current scale and scope of the Olympic Games and the Olympic

Winter Games (collectively "the Games"); to propose solutions to help manage the inherent

size, complexity and cost of staging the Olympic Games in the future; and to assess how the

Games can be made more streamlined and efficient.

The decision of the IOC President recognized the desire to maintain the position of the

Games as the most important sporting event in the world, while, at the same time, balancing

the need to keep the costs associated with the Games under reasonable control. In particular,

the Commission addressed measures to ensure that Games host cities do not incur greater

expenses than are necessary for the proper organization of the Games.

At the same time, the Commission was vigilant that proposed measures should not

undermine the universal appeal of the Games, nor compromise the conditions which allow

athletes to achieve their best sporting performance(s), while also enjoying the celebration of

the Games.

The Commission consists of members of the IOC who have broad and disparate experience

with the organization of sporting events, including the Games. It has had access to the

expertise, in particular, of experts who have had personal and recent experience with the

organization of the Games. It has been able to examine the costs (subject to the observations

made in the report) related to the Games; to study a number of the financial and logistical

challenges associated with the Games; and to assess the expanding scope of all aspects of the

Games in recent years.

Measures to counteract over-spending and gigantism have been addressed, as well as the

IOC’s efforts to assist organizers by transferring knowledge from the experiences of past and

current Games organizers. This will help to ensure that cities or countries are not

discouraged from bidding to host the Games.

The Commission presented an interim report to the IOC Session in Mexico City in November

2002, and provided a range of topics on which it proposed to do further work before

presenting its report to this IOC Session in Prague. The IOC Session gave its approval to

this process and to the general themes to be explored for that purpose. In accordance with

such approval, the Commission has pursued its work and now has the honour to submit this

report for consideration by the Session.

4Olympic Games Study Commission - Report to the 115th IOC Session


1 Introduction>

1 Introduction

Based on the Commission’s interim report, the IOC Session in Mexico City agreed to

add a new definition to the role of the IOC as defined in the Olympic Charter. While

the notion of sustainable development was previously limited to environmental

considerations only, reference to the idea of Olympic legacy was added:

"(The IOC) takes measures to promote a positive legacy from the Olympic Games to the

host city and the host country, including a reasonable control of the size and cost of the

Olympic Games, and encourages the Organizing Committees of the Olympic Games

(OCOGs), public authorities in the host country and the persons or organizations

belonging to the Olympic Movement to act accordingly." (Olympic Charter, Rule 2.13)

This fundamental change of philosophy underlines the Commission’s objective, not only to

perpetuate the success of the Games in the third Millennium, but also to maintain the IOC’scapacity to provide meaningful financial support for the Olympic Movement. As a

responsible organization, the IOC also wants to ensure that the host cities and their residents

are left with the most positive legacy of venues, infrastructure, expertise and experience.

This can be obtained only through careful definition of the Olympic Games "standard"

requirements and through firm control over the constant inflation of expectations, which has

been the trend during recent Olympiads.



>

Wide consultation: The Olympic Games is the biggest sporting event in the world. That

said, it is clear that there are many constituent groups and other stakeholders involved in the

Games. Against that background, the Commission determined, from the outset, to undertake

a wide process of consultation in order to make well-founded recommendations to the

Session. In keeping with this strategy, we opened up the consultation process to the various

constituents of the Olympic Movement, and contacted each International Federation,

National Olympic Committees, TOP sponsors, rights-holding broadcasters and IOC

commissions.

Preparatory working group in 2001: Prior to the Commission’s formal establishment,

preparatory working group meetings were held with executives of past and current OCOGs.

These working group meetings helped to identify the biggest challenges that OCOGs face

and the most significant growth factors that have been increasing the cost and size of the

Olympic Games. The outcomes of these meetings provided the Commission with a sound

basis from which to start its work. They also emphasized the size and scope of the task

ahead.

First meeting of the Commission – February 2002: The Commission held an

inaugural meeting in Salt Lake City. During this meeting, the research strategy was defined

and it was decided that detailed measurable data on the various areas of organizing the

Olympic Games should be collected. In order to obtain such information, we undertook

various studies with experts with OCOG experience. These studies provided us with

historical data from past Games and, in many cases, recommendations on how the size and

cost of organizing future Olympic Games could be controlled.

Difficulties: Whilst undertaking these studies, we noted that reliable cost comparisons

between various editions of the Games were very difficult to obtain, due to the different

organizational models that were used in the past. Costs have not been collected and

accounted for in a consistent manner, and vary, therefore, according to the particular

involvement of the public and private sectors in each country. The culture of each host

country and the specific legal constraints make such uniform accounting standards very

challenging. This is not intended as a criticism of particular Games organizers. The

Commission recommends that, in future, where possible, costs be recorded in a consistent

manner, which will make the work of the IOC in monitoring such costs easier and enable

potential cost savings to be identified for the benefit of subsequent Games organizers.

"Public Suggestions": Recognizing that the Olympic Games are a passion for all, the

Commission decided to open up its research and consultative process to the general public.

A "Public Suggestions" section was included on the IOC’s website at www.olympic.org from

25 May 2002. It was dedicated solely to gathering ideas on how to reduce the size, cost and

complexity of the Games. Private and public sports bodies, scholars, athletes and the general



2 Methodology>

public were invited to submit ideas relating to the organization of the Games. This web-

based programme allowed ideas to be submitted easily and facilitated categorization for

internal assessment and usage.

At the time of writing, the site had received more than 6,000 ideas. More than half of the

ideas submitted to "Public Suggestions" were related to the Olympic Programme and will

provide useful information for the Programme Commission. Other ideas focused on the

format of the Games, the bidding process, television coverage of the Games, and the

extravagance of the Opening and Closing Ceremonies, to name but a few. The success of this

process and the underlying software was such that the Commission recommends to the

Executive Board that it be promoted and used as part of a greater "outreach" programme by

the IOC to the public at large.

Interim Report – November 2002: The Commission’s interim report was approved by

the 114th IOC Session in November last year. As well as providing practical

recommendations on how to reduce the size and cost of the Olympic Games, the report also

proposed three fundamental changes to the Olympic Charter. The first focused on the role

the IOC plays in ensuring a positive legacy in each host city and country, as mentioned

above. The second removed the minimum length of time the Olympic Village needs to be

open prior to an Olympic Games; henceforth this duration will be determined by the

Executive Board ahead of each edition of the Games. The third means that OCOGs are no

longer obliged to print all publications and are encouraged to use electronic formats where

possible.

Final meeting of the Commission – April 2003: Finally, the Commission met in April

of this year to finalize the content and format of its report to this Session. The Commission

also fine-tuned and accepted the list of recommendations that are proposed in this report.



2 Methodology>

The following sections are important to take into account before considering the

Commission’s findings and recommendations. A few facts and background statistics outlined

in the interim report should be restated. Furthermore, a clear explanation of the scope of the

Commission’s work must be given, as a number of areas in the Games organization were not

covered.

3.1 Review

Increases in all aspects of Games participation, organization, complexity and cost have been

trade-offs for the growth in popularity of the Games and for the universal embracing of the

Olympic ideals.

The more professional approach to organizing the Games today has been driven by the

doubling or quadrupling in numbers and requirements in all areas of an OCOG over the last

20 years: increases in the number of sports, disciplines and events, as well as athlete

numbers, attending media, and competing nations and teams.

● From 159 participating NOCs and 237 events in Seoul 1988 to 200 NOCs and 300

events in Sydney.

● Accredited persons have doubled since Los Angeles in 1984 to Sydney in 2000, from

100,000 to 200,000.

● Olympic spectators purchased 6.7 million tickets in Sydney.

● The Games attracted 20,000 members of the accredited international media to Sydney

(press, broadcasters and the Olympic Broadcasting Organization).

● The 2000 Sydney Games were watched by 3.7 billion television viewers worldwide.

● The operating budget for an OCOG of a summer Olympic Games is about USD 2 billion

while the host government may also invest more than USD 1 billion.

● 17,000 security personnel were used in Sydney.

● 50,000 meals were served per day at the Sydney Olympic Village.

● 4,700 cars and vans were used by the Sydney OCOG.



3 Preliminary Considerations>

Consequences and "knock-on" effects

In today’s environment, the inter-dependencies across all functional areas, particularly with

respect to security and technology, mean that any increase in numbers, facilities and/or

services will directly impact the workforce requirements, complexity and costs in other

related functions.

If there was a predominant feature that emerged from the Commission’s work, it was that

much of the increased costs of organizing the Games resulted from a failure to appreciate the

"knock-on" effects of many of the actions or decisions that tended to be made in a "silo" or

in isolation, without considering or understanding the related effects on other aspects of the

Games organization process. If we were to be asked to reduce our many conclusions and

recommendations to a single sentence, it would be that no organizational decision be made

without a full assessment of the additional costs in other aspects of the Games organization.

For example, a common consequence of inefficient planning and use of venues is the

duplication of services. For each new venue, there is a requirement for the necessary

workforce, facilities and services, all of which add to increases in the size, complexity and

cost of the Games.

In addition, the post-Games maintenance costs associated with venues are often

underestimated. The costs of maintaining an under-utilized venue post-Games can place a

considerable financial burden on the host city and may ultimately be counterproductive to the

use for which they were originally intended.

With a larger competition programme, more spectators, more people to accredit,

accommodate and transport, modern Games planning, preparation and operations have

become extremely sophisticated and complex. The main consequences have been

organizational inefficiencies in terms of planning, organizational structure, operations and

communication. Flaws in the definitions of requirements have led to misinterpretation,

inefficient planning and subsequent cost increases. This may also result in a lack of control

mechanisms which are important to enhance best business practices and to coordinate with

key stakeholders to ensure that decisions are taken in the best interests of the Olympic

Games.

The Commission’s interim report concluded that:

● The addition of new sports, disciplines and events is a principal driver forthe increase in size of the Olympic Games. Decisions in this regard have had

significant knock-on effects for all Games functional areas. The Commission fully

supports the IOC Executive Board in its resolve to contain the number of athletes, sports

and events in future editions of the Olympic Games.




● The Games have reached a critical size, which may put their future success at risk

if the size continues to increase. Steps must be undertaken and serious consideration

given to manage future growth, while at the same time preserve the attractiveness of the

Games.

● If unchecked, the current growth of the Games could discourage manycities from bidding to host the Games.

Also important to keep in mind are the key success factors that the Commission has

identified:

● Athletes’ experience: The Olympic Games attract many of the best athletes in the

world, representing the pinnacle in these athletes’ careers. The opportunity to compete

under the ideals of Olympism, and the feeling of "being a part" of the Olympic family,

offer both athletes and spectators a unique competitive environment.

● Broadcasting the Games: The expansion and improvements in broadcasting the

Olympic Games have helped to promote the Games internationally, taking the passion,

drama and spectacle of the Games into the living rooms of the largest global audience

of any event.

● Unity in time and space: Although many members of the public mentioned the

extension of the Games duration and staging the Games in several neighbouring host

cities at the same time, the Commission believes that the principle of unity in space and

time, or "One Games - One City", should be maintained in order to ensure that the

Games remain the world’s greatest sporting event and to guarantee that the athletes’experience remains intact. In that regard, the Commission did not want to damage

precisely the essential elements that have made the Games such a universal success.

● City atmosphere: The host city and its citizens provide the distinctly unique character

and festive atmosphere to each Olympic Games.

● Legacy for the host city/region: The Olympic Games are often a force for positive

change and/or infrastructure development in the host city.




3.2 The Focus of the Commission

It is important for IOC members to understand that this report and the work of the

Commission have not taken into consideration certain aspects of the organization of the

Games. For example:

● The Commission has NOT dealt with the design of the Olympic Programme. This

matter is the responsibility of the Programme Commission, which reports separately to

the IOC Executive Board. As IOC members are aware, the Programme Commission is

preparing a separate report that will outline, in more detail than currently exists in the

Olympic Charter, the criteria that the IOC should adopt in respect of sports, disciplines

and events on the current and future Olympic Programmes. The eventual design of the

Olympic Programme will, of course, have cost implications for the organizers of the

Games. Some sports are, clearly, more expensive to organize than others and this matter

may well be among the factors that should be studied in depth as the Olympic

Programme is considered. It is also important to understand that the addition of any

sport or discipline (and possibly even a new event) to the Olympic Programme will have

cost implications, some of which may be significant.

● The Commission has NOT studied, nor commented upon, the general criteria for

selecting host cities for the Games, which fall within the process of assessing applicant

cities, choosing candidate cities and the evaluation of candidate cities. It has developed

some suggestions for criteria that might usefully be considered during this process, but

has not commented upon the process as such.

● The Commission has NOT studied, nor commented upon, the process by which the IOC

and host cities of the Games raise funds for their operations, nor on the principles that

should be applied when the division of such revenues is determined. No submissions

have been received from either the Marketing Commission or the TV and Internet

Rights Commission. There are several issues in this process that may warrant special

study by the appropriate commissions. Depending upon the directions that are

determined, there may be important implications that would bear on the conclusions of

our Commission.

● The Commission has NOT studied the manner in which the internal organization of the

IOC will be re-shaped to deal with the ongoing management process of multiple Games

organizations, each at a different stage of maturity, other than to commend the decision

to identify the position of Olympic Games Executive Director and to congratulate

Gilbert Felli on his appointment to that position.




● The Commission has NOT studied the method by which the Coordination Commissions

will exercise their mandate, other than to emphasize the importance of such

Commissions as valuable resources for both the IOC and Games organizers and to

reinforce the need for such Commissions to be properly empowered to make the

necessary decisions, not merely to give advice, relating to the organization of the Games

for which they are responsible. General comments have been provided for purposes of

highlighting the importance of this process.

On the other hand, in pursuance of the themes identified in its interim report, the

Commission HAS studied:

● The basic requirements necessary for the organization of Games that will preserve the

special nature of the Games as the foremost international sports event in the world.

● The importance of developing a Games "template" that can be implemented to ensure

that costs are kept under reasonable control. This template should consist of the

Olympic Charter, the Host City Contract and a comprehensive set of guidelines for

particular functions, venues and/or constituents. Parts of this template already exist,

while some are in the process of being updated, and others are in development. This

"template" will be made available well before the process of applying to host future

Games will commence.

● Optimal sizes for Games venues.

● Maximal use of venues.

● Reduction of non-essential services and activities.

● Temporary versus permanent venues and facilities, in the context of Games costs and

legacies.

● Effective communication of genuine Olympic requirements.

● Size and scope of media services during the Games.

● Reduction of non-essential collateral activities.

● Minimizing Olympic Village costs.

● Non-duplication of facilities and services.

● Scope and timing of recruiting Organizing Committee staff.




Also important to note is that among the several audits of the IOC that were conducted in

2002, some conclusions related to the IOC internal structure, and several recommendations

focused on proposed reductions or simplifications in the organization of the Games. Such

recommendations will need to be carefully considered when the proposals contained in the

present report are approved and eventually implemented.

On the basis of its studies, the Commission concluded that it should come forward with about

100 separate recommendations for general consideration by the IOC Session. These were

presented to the IOC Executive Board at its meeting in May 2003, and approved for

submission to the Session. It is not intended that the Session consider each recommendation

in detail, since the great majority are matters of detailed implementation at various stages of

Games bidding and organization. As such, they are matters that will be applied by the IOC

Executive Board and the relevant commissions. Rather, what the Commission seeks from the

Session, with the approval of the Executive Board, is general endorsement of the approach

and the areas in which savings and simplifications can occur. The Commission notes that

there will undoubtedly be more areas in which savings can be effected, once the general

approach and mind-set have been accepted.

It is important to understand that no single recommendation will, in and of itself, provide a

complete solution to the problem of the cost, size and complexity of the Games. The sum of

the recommendations is, instead, reflective of an attitude that should be adopted by the IOC,

the Games organizers and other interested parties. The enormous increases in Olympic

revenues in the past couple of decades, derived principally from the leadership of the IOC,

appear to have allowed Games organizers to relax, to some degree, their efforts to control

costs, because the revenues to support higher expenditure have been available to them. Also,

many stakeholders have become increasingly demanding and have put a great deal of

pressure on Games organizers to provide ever bigger facilities and better services, without

proper IOC control and approval. The role of the IOC is to inculcate a sense of constantly

seeking ways to ensure that the IOC, as the organization ultimately responsible for the

success of the Games, and the Games organizers, as those who direct the application of

Games revenues and host country investment, never lose sight of the objective of delivering

the best possible Games for the least amount of money.




This section outlines some of the key principles to be considered by the IOC when moving

into an implementation phase and putting the Commission’s recommendations into practice.

The Commission stresses the importance for applicant cities to give early consideration to

the essential Olympic Games requirements and for the IOC to properly communicate the

existence of such an Olympic template to the public and applicant/bidding cities. In

addition, venues represent one of the driving elements in the increase of the Games budget

and complexity. Combining use of venues, making more use of temporary facilities,

planning clusters of venues and considering more carefully the post-Olympic use of venues

are all means by which the magnitude of the Games can be better controlled as well as their

legacy maximized.

The IOC should complete and communicate, after consultation with the IFs, NOCs and other

relevant stakeholders, a comprehensive inventory of the requirements to stage the Games.

We refer to this in our report from time to time as the Games "template." Such Games

"template" should be posted on the IOC website, accompanied by explanations as to its

purpose and the commitment of the IOC to minimizing the cost, size and complexity of

organizing the Games.

4.1 Begin at the Beginning

Mathematicians have demonstrated that if an exploratory satellite is launched in the direction

of Mars and is off-course by even half a degree at the launch, the satellite will be millions of

miles off-target by the time it reaches outer space.

This principle is equally important for the IOC, since it is the IOC, in its fundamental role as

"franchisor" of the Games, which has the primary responsibility to indicate clearly those

Games requirements that are essential, and to identify excesses that are neither necessary nor

perhaps even desirable. Applicant cities should be aware of the Games requirements before

they commence the process of generating public support for a Games bid and before they

enter the process of becoming a candidate city and, eventually, a host city.

There is a convenient, but incorrect, public perception that the IOC has demanded many of

the excessive facilities and trimmings that have often been features of Games in the past.

Although the perception is incorrect, it is nevertheless true that the IOC has not always

stepped in quickly enough to require a more careful assessment of the implications of many

Games expenses. In particular, many of the IOC guidelines have not always been developed

in the context of understanding the "knock-on" costs that a specific requirement may

generate.



4 Considerations for Implementation>

Our conclusion is that the control of Games costs must begin long before Games organizers

come into existence. The control must begin with a well-understood and well-communicated

Games "template," which specifies the real needs for the Games, and which identifies

anything in excess of those needs, so that the public and the bidding cities know exactly what

is required and, perhaps even more importantly, what is not required. The IOC must make it

clear that it does not subscribe to a view that "bigger is better." The IOC must also make it

clear that any such attitude will likely be a handicap, rather than an advantage, for any bid.

Sharing venues and facilities at the Games, the list of sports and disciplines that will

comprise the Games, as well as the schedule of competition must be determined prior to the

application process. Furthermore, the Olympic competition schedule must not necessarily be

the same as for each sport’s world championships and should be designed with the notion of

sharing venues where possible. Permanent facilities should be built only when a clear post-

Games legacy can be demonstrated, and the use of temporary facilities must be encouraged

wherever possible. Many ideas related to the use of venues apply equally to competition

venues, non-competition venues and training venues. These elements must be made known

to applicant and bidding cities when the Games are first conceptualized.

The Commission recognizes, of course, that not all circumstances are the same and that it

would be unwise to be completely inflexible in such matters. A city of five million people

may well have different ongoing infrastructure needs than a city of one million. Also, the

cultural approach and local perception in each host country are different and must be taken

into account. But, in weighing up such circumstances, the IOC must make it clear to the

bidders, and to their publics, that any increases over and above the Games template are not

the result of Games requirements. When applicant cities are evaluated to determine whether

they warrant selection as candidate cities, the ongoing use of facilities after the Games must

be a critical element in the decisions that are made. These aspects must be specifically

identified in both their positive and negative senses. These considerations are even more

important when the Evaluation Commission process is instituted.

4.2 IOC Evaluation Commissions

One of the most important recent innovations of the IOC in the process of selecting host

cities has been the creation of the Evaluation Commission. This Commission replaced three

separate commissions: one established by the IOC, one by the IFs and a third by the NOCs.

This was a valuable consolidation of effort and led to a more concerted assessment of the

candidate cities. Since the 1999 reforms proposed by the IOC 2000 Commission and

affirmation of such reforms by the IOC Session in Mexico City in 2000, the role of the

Evaluation Commissions has become even more crucial. Because the IOC members will no longer

visit candidate cities, they must be able to rely, to an ever-increasing extent, on the reports they

receive from the Evaluation Commissions in order to assist them in their choices.




Under the new process for electing host cities for the Games, the Evaluation Commissions

have a duty to identify excesses and to focus attention on them, in clear and precise language.

The IOC members, and the public in each candidate city’s country, must be made aware of

the implications of any aspects of the bids that exceed the Games template. IOC members

themselves must exercise a particular duty of responsibility, to demonstrate that they support

these principles, when they vote to elect a host city for the Games. Additionally, roles and

responsibilities between the IOC and other stakeholders must be clearly defined. It is the

IOC, in consultation with other parties, which establishes Games requirements and takes the

necessary measures to stop inflation.

This factor places an extra burden on the Evaluation Commissions to be sure that all aspects

of each candidate city’s bid are properly identified and assessed. It will also require a change

in the traditional mind-set that has been a feature of IOC reports regarding candidate cities.

The Evaluation Commissions must be prepared to make choices and distinctions between

candidate cities for the benefit of IOC members, since only the Commissions have the

opportunity to see and to study in the requisite detail each of the candidacies. It will no

longer be appropriate to couch the reports in bland generalizations or to refer only vaguely

to certain "challenges" that will be faced by particular cities if they are chosen. Both the

strong and weak points of each candidate must be clearly identified. The candidate cities are

in a competition and they must be prepared to be judged accordingly.

The following principles related to the IOC Evaluation Commissions are submitted for

consideration by the IOC:

● The IOC Executive Board should review the mandate of the Evaluation Commissions

and make changes to ensure that their reports are complete, specific and useful for their

intended purpose.

● Evaluation Commission reports should focus on the cost aspects of the various

candidacies, specifically identifying variations from the Games "template" and the

resultant cost and complexity increases.

● Evaluation Commissions should press for reliable information on legacy aspects of each

Games facility and probe for opportunities to use temporary facilities and to double-up

on usage of facilities.

● Host city and host country governments should be requested to confirm in writing any

legacy needs that exceed the Olympic "template" and to provide reliable assurances as

to financing of construction and funding of post-Games usage.

● Any variations from the IOC guidelines that may appear in applications and in the

proposals of candidate cities should be highlighted, and cost estimates of the variations

should be obtained from the cities involved, be assessed by the IOC for accuracy, then

published.




● The IOC Executive Board should develop an IOC communications strategy to make

clear the mandate of the Evaluation Commissions, including a specific component

directed to the costs of organizing the Games. Such a communication strategy must also

be designed to inform the public of the IOC’s intentions regarding the cost, size and

complexities of the organization of the Games and additional costs resulting from the

plans of potential host cities. It should address the objective of creating the best

possible legacy of the Games (which does not mean the "biggest" facilities) and the

cooperative management of the preparations for and operations of the Games under the

guidance of the IOC.

4.3 IOC Coordination Commissions

Good intentions, on both sides, need to be carefully monitored during the organizational

phase of the Games. Once the IOC Session has awarded the Games to a city, operational

responsibility devolves on the OCOG, the IOC Executive Board and the Coordination

Commissions. It is often said, only partly in jest, that the only amateurs left in the Games

today are the organizers. Although recent OCOGs have undoubtedly hired highly qualified

people, there is no doubt that each OCOG has a huge learning curve if it is to master the

complications that relate to the Games and, therefore, it needs the most effective support

from the IOC. Quite often, as well, the organizers are not necessarily the same as those who

led the bids. In many cases, they have no sense of what went in to the design of the bid and

do not always agree with the Olympic Charter, the Host City Contract, the guidelines

attached to that Contract, or with the role of the IOC with respect to important decisions

applicable to the Games. In the past, the real process of negotiation for many OCOGs started

only after they had been formed, not when the Games were awarded to the host city. Today,

this process starts early, with candidate cities required to provide the IOC with a large

number of guarantees before the Games are awarded. The IOC should continue its efforts in

this direction.

It is important, therefore, that at the earliest stages of the Games organization, the IOC

Executive Board makes the rules clear and is certain that the OCOGs understand the various

responsibilities. It is also of paramount importance that the IOC Executive Board fully

supports the active part that the Coordination Commissions will play. OCOGs must also

understand that decisions are made on the basis of considerable experience with the

organization of Games and that one of the ways in which Games will be successful is to

avoid certain experiences of past Games and, in many cases, to use positive experiences from

such Games as well. The same mathematical principle, identified above, of missing the

eventual goal applies equally to the early part of the Games organizational process.




The following principles related to the IOC Coordination Commissions are submitted for

consideration by the IOC:

● IOC must continue to ensure that its Coordination Commissions perform at their best by

relying on the broad range of experience and expertise of their members and advisors,

while being properly supported by a well-structured IOC administration. The credibility

of the Commissions and of the IOC depends on these choices and the willingness of the

members to devote the necessary time and concentration to their responsibilities.

● The IOC Executive Board should review the mandate and structure of the Coordination

Commissions and update the mandate to ensure that the Commissions have the

necessary authority to make such decisions as may be necessary to assist the Games

organizers, particularly with respect to the costs and complexities of the Games.

● The working methods of the Coordination Commissions should be re-examined to

ensure maximum effectiveness. Full meetings of the Commissions may be less effective

than smaller, specialized teams that can enter into specific matters in greater detail,

managed by the Olympic Games Executive Director, with such experts as he may

consider appropriate and advisable.

● The transition from candidate cities to OCOGs should be accelerated as much as

possible.

● As soon as possible following the establishment of the OCOG, the Commission should

meet with the OCOG leadership. The IOC President should be part of such initial

meeting to explain the roles of the IOC and the Coordination Commission, as well as

the joint objectives of the IOC and the OCOG in the organization of the Games.

● This initial meeting with the OCOG should be supported by an IOC communications

strategy that will explain the relationships and create reasonable public expectations.

● Coordination Commissions should ensure transparent cooperation and communication

between the OCOGs and governmental authorities in relation to the organization of the

Games. Any dysfunctional relationships must be identified early and be quickly

resolved. Many problems with respect to Games in the past could have been minimized

by a faster response to such circumstances.

● Although contractual frameworks are established at the time the Games are awarded,

conditions change, and Coordination Commissions should not be insensitive to

reasonable requests for variations, provided that the integrity and status of the Games

are not compromised and provided that the cost implications of any change are

identified, are acceptable to the OCOG (including governments that may be involved)

and are communicated in a timely and transparent manner to the public of the host

country.




● The Coordination Commission, working closely with Olympic Games Knowledge

Services ("OGKS"), should determine, as soon as possible, the optimum involvement of

OGKS with the OCOG.

These proposed principles are, by their nature, general indications of steps that the IOC is in

a position to control in the early stages of each Games’ organization, each of which can have

a significant impact on the costs of the Games, in many cases, running to tens or even

hundreds of millions of dollars. Most importantly, however, they set the tone for an approach

that is cost-conscious from the very outset of the project.

4.4 Progress Made to Date

Although the Commission’s work started in late 2001 and the recommendations in this report

are to be considered on the occasion of the 115th IOC Session in July 2003, several steps

have already been taken by the IOC which bring the Commission’s philosophy into practice.

● The IOC Executive Board has approved measures to contain the number of athletes and

sports in future editions of the Olympic Games.

● The transfer of knowledge from past to present and future organizers has been

reinforced. The IOC has set up OGKS with its headquarters in Lausanne to provide

services to Games organizers and other major sporting event organizers. For example,

technical guides and software used and developed in Sydney were transferred to Salt

Lake City.

● In Beijing, the capacity of some competition venues was reduced after the bid

acceptance (as well as their location), thus taking into account a more realistic potential

post-Olympic use, and leaving a better legacy in the city.

● Several services and access rights have been reviewed and streamlined such as:

- automatic access to free meals at the Olympic Village dining hall for some

members of the Olympic Family,

- limited access to prime-event limitation sessions for certain categories of

accreditations,

- use of dedicated cars replaced with a shuttle bus or pool car system for certain

stakeholders,

- provision of assistants only to IOC members who have requested them,

- reduction of the number of commission meetings and congresses at Games-time,

- reduction or elimination of parallel social programmes at Games-time for guests,

- reduction of catering service in the Olympic Family lounges.




● Late opening of the winter Olympic Village since Salt Lake City (10 days prior to the

Opening Ceremony instead of two weeks).

● Reduction in the number of IOC Medical Commission members, thereby reducing

Games attendance costs.

The effect of some of these measures will be measurable only during the next editions of the

Games, when the impact on the complexity of the organization and on the organizers’ budget,

as well as on the Olympic legacy for the host city and residents, can be properly assessed.

The next section of this report focuses on the themes identified and approved for further

investigation by the IOC Session in Mexico City last November.




>

This section of the report contains the technical recommendations that the Commission has

retained and for which it seeks general approval. The recommendations have been structured

according to five major themes already used in the interim report.

5.1 Games Format

5.2 Venues and Facilities

5.3 Games Management

5.4 Number of Accredited Persons

5.5 Service Levels

Each of these themes is introduced by outlining the general underlying principles which were

validated by the IOC Session in Mexico City last November. Within each of the themes, the

ideas have been grouped by subject area and are formulated as short and concise

recommendations in order to facilitate the reading and understanding of the text.

Each of the recommendations in this report is based on a detailed and in-depth analysis,

which has been conducted by one or more experts (please refer to the last page of this report

for the list of 40 experts who contributed), and which compares trends, costs and other

material to support the recommendations. The expert studies have been consolidated and

formatted in a consistent manner to allow comparisons and effective discussion during the

Commission meetings. You will find samples of the detailed supporting material in Annexes

A and B.

● Annex A: Sample of the summary version of the recommendations in a table format.

This document gives a comprehensive overview of each recommendation with related

key data and potential budget savings based on the experience of recent editions of the

Games. This format was most helpful for the review of the recommendations by the

Commission during its last meeting and will also be a useful reference during the

follow-up and implementation phase.

● Annex B: Sample of a detailed recommendation sheet. Each recommendation is

documented and is presented in a consistent manner with detailed references where

required. The complete version of all recommendations in this format consists of

approximately 150 pages.

When reviewing the recommendations, members will note that there are some specific

practical recommendations, whereas others are of a more general nature or need further

analysis. It will be important to distinguish the nature of each recommendation in the follow-

up and implementation phase.

The Commission has also analyzed and considered other ideas which it decided not to

recommend. These included, e.g., the idea to remove the entitlement of summer IF

presidents and secretaries general to attend Olympic Winter Games and vice versa.



5 Recommendations

>

5.1 Games FormatThe Commission felt that it was important to address the question of the general Games

format. A number of comments were made by Olympic stakeholders or the public with

respect to the duration and location of the Games (e.g., the extension of the Games duration

over more than two weeks and the hosting of the Games in several neighbouring host cities).

The Commission paid particular attention to these aspects and weighed the arguments for and

against those changes to the Games format.

The Commission firmly believes that the principle of unity in space and time or "One Games

- One City", should be maintained in order to ensure that the Games remain the world’sgreatest sporting event and to guarantee that the athletes’ experience remains intact. In that

regard, the Commission did not want to damage precisely the essential elements that have

made the Games such a universal success.

Principles

The IOC should re-affirm the following Olympic Charter principles:

● The Olympic Games are awarded to one host city.

● The duration of the competitions shall not exceed sixteen days.

● Only sports practiced on snow and ice may be considered as winter sports on the

Olympic Winter Games programme.

Other considerations include:

1.01 Recommendation: Competition format and schedules should be determined in terms of

venue requirements, instead of on a stand-alone basis.

1.02 Recommendation: Sports and disciplines should not be changed from the programme

established seven years prior to the Games, as provided in the

Olympic Charter.

1.03 Recommendation: Share venues wherever possible according to technical feasibility

and competition format and schedule.

1.04 Recommendation: Minimize travel times and distances between venues.



5 Recommendations>

5.2 Venues and FacilitiesThe Olympic venues, including choice of location, capacity, construction, overlay and

operations, represent a major cost component of any Games. Venue planning and venue

usage is not always optimised and not enough consideration is given to post-Games needs

and means of limiting the costs.

Principles

● Minimize the costs and maximize the use of competition, non-competition and

training venues.

● Guarantee an efficient usage in terms of time, space and services.

● Give proper consideration to the Olympic legacy.

Venue Selection and Construction

2.01 Recommendation: Adopt the following principles for venue selection: use existing

venues with refurbishment if needed; build a new venue only if

there is a legacy need, ensuring flexible use if possible; if there is

no legacy need, seek a temporary solution.

2.02 Recommendation: Review and rationalize gross venue capacities. This is part of the

leitmotif of cost reduction generally and the avoidance of Olympic

white elephants.

2.03 Recommendation: Review the process by which sports are allocated to particular

venues during the bidding phase.

2.04 Recommendation: Rationalize the number of competition and training venues actually

required, to decrease venue costs.

2.05 Recommendation: Develop venues in clusters. Several stand-alone venues are much

more expensive than clusters.

2.06 Recommendation: Maximize temporary installations over permanent construction,

especially where legacy requirements are less than Games

requirements.

2.07 Recommendation: Develop venue design standards to prevent over-building, over-

servicing and over-spending.



5 Recommendations>

>

2.08 Recommendation: The IOC must determine, in conjunction with the IFs, principles for

selecting venues, including refurbishing existing facilities, flexible

spectator capacities, temporary solutions and the number of

facilities reasonably required.

2.09 Recommendation: Before taking the decision to have satellite Villages and providing

the services that go with these, the costs and knock-on effects need

to be properly assessed (this mainly applies to Winter Games due to

the distance between venues).

Venue Seating

2.10 Recommendation: Review the possibility of reducing quantity of reserved seating for

the Olympic Family in venues (e.g. Stand of Honour, official stand,

Federation stand and J stand) by capping at a certain percentage of

the total venue capacity for final rounds.

2.11 Recommendation: Reduce the quantity of reserved seating in venues by reducing

allocations between preliminary and final events.

2.12 Recommendation: Reduce the quantity of reserved seating in venues for the Closing

Ceremony, recognising the lower demand compared to the Opening

Ceremony, owing to the departure of Olympic Family members.

2.13 Recommendation: Reduce the quantity of reserved seating in venues by introducing

quotas for categories with indefinite numbers, such as "Domestic

Dignitaries".

2.14 Recommendation: For outdoor venues, use reserved standing areas next to tribunes

where practicable according to sport and venue

2.15 Recommendation: Reduce quantity of reserved seating by locating Olympic Family

Lounges with a view of the field of play and close to the reserved

stands, where possible, thus allowing Olympic Family members to

watch competitions from the Lounge.

2.16 Recommendation: Reduce the ratio of tabled/non-tabled press seats, making more

seats available for the public, while keeping the same total number

of press seats.

2.17 Recommendation: Make sections of non-tabled press seats available for public sale

during early rounds of competition.



5 Recommendations>

2.18 Recommendation: Give more early consideration to sightlines for photographers and

television cameras. Many of the latter’s platforms are very

generous in size and cut down on spectator seating. This will be

particularly important if smaller venues are constructed.

Operations

2.19 Recommendation: Reduce the period of venue lease and full operations for both

competition and non-competition venues. This relates, in

particular, to pre-Games opening of the Olympic Village, opening

dates for the MPC and IBC, and the period of operation and build-

out schedule for competition and training venues.

2.20 Recommendation: Develop functional area operational standards and service levels for

venues and constituent groups to educate and guide OCOGs and to

prevent over-building, over-servicing and over-spending. This

should help provide budget consistency and lower staffing

requirements.

2.21 Recommendation: Decrease training venue costs by training in competition venues

wherever feasible.

2.22 Recommendation: Decrease training venue costs by expanding daily use of each

venue, where possible.

Media

2.23 Recommendation: Indicate a clear preference for media hotel accommodation over

media villages. Constructing media villages is extremely

expensive, as is the related fit-out, such as telephones, television

sets with CATV, catering, transport, staff and security.

2.24 Recommendation: Reduce MPC bullpen and press conference capacity, some of which

is regularly excessive. Occasional overflow in the main conference

room can be solved with the use of adjacent rooms.

2.25 Recommendation: Combine venue media centres and reduce size and build-out where

possible.

2.26 Recommendation: Scale down media work rooms and facilities at media villages and

provide only basic facilities. A small internet cafe with a few work

tables and an INFO kiosk may well suffice.



5 Recommendations>

2.27 Recommendation: Review need for and scope of media work room and media

facilities at the Olympic Village, since bulk of media activities

occur at competition venues and Main Press Centre (MPC) /

International Broadcast Centre (IBC)

2.28 Recommendation: Cost comparisons, between use of existing facilities for the IBC and

MPC and the construction of temporary or permanent facilities for

such purpose, should be obtained and verified, taking into account

the possibility of combining the two facilities where appropriate in

order to reduce infrastructure and operations cost.

Olympic Family Lounges

2.29 Recommendation: Reduce cost and build-out of Olympic Family Lounges, which are

typically sized for medal rounds; plan to accommodate average

attendance.

2.30 Recommendation: Retain only one Olympic Family Lounge by eliminating IF and

secondary Olympic Family lounges.

2.31 Recommendation: Combine Olympic Family Lounges in clustered venues.

Others

2.32 Recommendation: For the sport of curling, eliminate the current requirement of 20

individual dressing rooms and provide locker space instead.

2.33 Recommendation: Review the concept of stand-alone ski wax cabins for teams and ski

companies and compare to what is done for world

championships and world cups. One shared facility should be

provided as standard, and teams who want stand-alone cabins

can acquire them on the basis of established rate cards, so that

the OCOG is not put to extra expense.

2.34 Recommendation: Re-examine the obligation to provide a sponsor village, as well as

responsibility for the related costs. This must be studied in relation

to the revenue side of the equation regarding Games sponsorships.



5 Recommendations>

5.3 Games ManagementThe evolution of the Olympic Games and their steady growth in recent years also call for

organizational adjustments and changes in management style. Initial steps by the IOC have

proven positive, but a clear strategy for the management of the franchise and the role of the

IOC need to be better defined. All recommendations on Games management need to be

coordinated with the conclusion of the Games audit conducted in 2002, which aims at

analyzing the current IOC Games management structure.

Principle

Recognising the fact that the Games are evolving, the IOC should clearly define its

role and responsibilities within the Olympic Movement vis-a-vis all involved parties,

with the objective of improving Games governance. The OCOGs should adopt more

effective business processes with the objective of creating more efficient and

coordinated Games management with work practices that maximize all resources.

Transfer of Knowledge. Experience and Solutions

3.01 Recommendation: Use existing know-how transferred through the Olympic Games

Knowledge Management Programme, such as standard operating

policies and procedures and best practice guides based on previous

Games, e.g., to reduce staffing requirements and consultants’expenses.

3.02 Recommendation: Accelerate and promote the transfer of knowledge, not only

between OCOGs, but also include the host city and related

government agencies in the process.

3.03 Recommendation: Existing solutions from previous Games should be used where

possible, to avoid inventing new solutions, particularly with respect

to technology.

3.04 Recommendation: Impose management standards for generic project areas to be

transferred from Games to Games. Specific areas would include

Games terminology and codes, accounting standards and planning

tools.

3.05 Recommendation: Develop long-term multi-Games relationships with knowledgeable

providers (e.g., temporary facilities, equipment and services,

cleaning, waste, catering, overlay, electrical generators and

distribution, tents, seating, lighting, sound, heating and cooling,

security equipment and project management).



5 Recommendations>

>

3.06 Recommendation: Support material and documentation for workforce training should

be managed on a permanent basis to ensure the effective transfer

between OCOGs.

3.07 Recommendation: It would be helpful to develop a standard set of accounts that could

provide the basis for reliable costs comparisons from Games to

Games and that could add to the reliability of OGKS advice.

3.08 Recommendation: Avoid excessive early staffing, leaving early organizational

planning to a smaller experienced team.

Government Involvement

3.09 Recommendation: Optimize government and host city involvement throughout the

planning process to establish clear definitions of essential

deliverables and genuine teamwork with the OCOG.

3.10 Recommendation: Clarify and communicate differences between Games requirements

(e.g., health services and security) and discretionary legacy (e.g.,

facilities, tourism and economic impact) or entertainment elements

(e.g., extensive live sites and city entertainment).

3.11 Recommendation: Medal plaza focus should be the athletes, with a reasonable level of

entertainment, not the reverse.

Broadcasting

3.12 Recommendation: Some coverage of preliminary sessions in some sports may not

need to be covered in full by the OBO. Further analysis and

discussions with IFs, rights-holding broadcasters and the IOC RTV

Commission are needed.

3.13 Recommendation: Expand role of the OBO as provider and coordinator of special

broadcast services, such as High-Definition Television, virtual reality.

This can save a number of RHB accreditations.

3.14 Recommendation: Reduce the number of entities which have access to broadcast

portions of the Games, such as IOC official film, VTOK (Video

Transfer of Knowledge), IMAX, other special applications,

biomechanical film, IFs and NOCs, sponsors, news, security,

etc. Make greater use of the OBO as central provider of such

needs.



5 Recommendations>

Marketing

3.15 Recommendation: Better management of Value-in-Kind (VIK) and better negotiation

of non-budget relieving VIK. This includes early planning and

scoping of needs and better understanding of the pricing, which is

often not transparent. Sponsorship categories should be assessed

against the ability of the sponsor to provide the necessary goods or

services.

3.16 Recommendation: Sponsor "showcasing" should not result in OCOG-borne costs from

knock-on effects.

3.17 Recommendation: Sponsorship category negotiations should minimize the possibility

of the "spoiler" effect of sponsors claiming categories not promoted

for Games purposes, but which may be occupied by competitors.

Paralympics

3.18 Recommendation: Incorporate Paralympic planning into Olympic planning as closely

as possible from the early planning stage.

3.19 Recommendation: Use the same uniforms for both the Olympic Games and the

Paralympic Games, with a few removable (or additional) elements

to establish the necessary distinctions.

3.20 Recommendation: Integrate the "Look of the Games" and the imaging programme,

through use of same pictograms and signage, same design

elements, etc. for the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games,

while maintaining a distinct identity for each organization.

Culture

3.21 Recommendation: Youth camps should not be part of the bidding process. If host

cities wish to hold such camps, this can be discussed after the

Games have been awarded.

3.22 Recommendation: Wherever possible, cultural events should be run by existing

cultural organizations, rather than parallel OCOG departments.

3.23 Recommendation: Offer better and more effective education (e.g., in schools) by using

existing resources and material at the IOC, the Olympic Museum

and OGKS.



5 Recommendations>

Meetings

3.24 Recommendation: Streamline the organization of IOC Executive Board meeting and

Session prior to the Games to reduce the organizational burden on

the OCOG.

3.25 Recommendation: Congresses and commission meetings should not occur during or

immediately prior to Games-time. Do not hold any congresses or

commission meetings in the host city that are not related to those

Games.

IOC Governance

3.26 Recommendation: Review the Host City Contract and annexes to ensure that they

provide the proper scope to control costs and provide the IOC with

the necessary authority to act.

3.27 Recommendation: Ensure that there is a clear definition of the role and responsibilities

of the IOC and other Olympic Movement stakeholders with respect

to Games management issues, including service levels and final

seating capacities, while leaving genuine sports technical

elements to the IFs.

Others

3.28 Recommendation: Control accommodation (hotel) pricing through a mechanism to be

proposed by the IOC to bidding cities.

3.29 Recommendation: Set the minimum period of stay for constituents, allowing two

waves of stay.

3.30 Recommendation: Limit the Torch Relay to the host country and to a maximum

duration of 100 days from the lighting in Olympia.

3.31 Recommendation: Review the situation for IF delegations and technical officials in

order to contain the costs in this category. This should be a prime

consideration for a working group, to be established with ASOIF

and AWOIF, to examine, inter alia, stabilization of numbers of

technical officials and the service levels provided.

3.32 Recommendation: Consider outsourcing the provision of INFO content, which is a

costly distraction for OCOGs.



5 Recommendations>

3.33 Recommendation: Better selection and organization of test events. It is not necessary

to organize world championships or world cups to test the facilities.

Encourage groupings of test events to more closely imitate Games

conditions.

3.34 Recommendation: Ensure efficient rate card management, to allow OCOGs to recover

all costs without subsidizing stakeholders, while at the same time

ensuring that rate cards are not used opportunistically to extract

unreasonable prices from stakeholders or to recover sponsorship

costs.

3.35 Recommendation: OCOGs can use economies of scale and purchasing power to help

rate-card users and other stakeholders acquire the necessary buses

and mini-buses at Games time at lower costs.

3.36 Recommendation: Reduce OCOG funding requirements for the IOC Medical

Commission visits, which now extend to travel, board and lodging

for one meeting of the IOC Medical Commission one year prior to

the Games and another during the Games.



5 Recommendations>

5.4 Number of Accredited PersonsEvery accreditation has an associated cost, which is determined by the access and service

entitlements of the accredited person. The accreditation gives access to sports events,

lounges, transport and/or other special facilities and services. The scoping of the venue

space, services, etc. depends on the number and access entitlements of the accredited

persons, which have increased dramatically in recent editions of the Games.

Principle

The IOC should establish appropriate guidelines and find ways of containing (and

ideally decreasing) the overall number of accredited persons on the occasion of the

Games. The focus should be on groups that have experienced the most dramatic

increases, those which have more flexible rules and those that do not have any

maximum numbers.

4.01 Recommendation: Adapt the number of volunteers to real needs. These numbers

should not be established on the basis of "peak shifts" but on the

actual venue operational needs, which will reduce the number

of volunteers needed, reduce the recruiting, training and

outfitting costs, as well as the attrition caused by the boredom

of being significantly under-used during the Games period.

4.02 Recommendation: Establish mechanisms to better control numbers of accredited

contractors and sponsors’ staff, based on detailed operational plans

and requirements, to be approved by the OCOG and Coordination

Commission. Contractual provisions should be developed to

ensure such controls.

4.03 Recommendation: Work with rights-holding broadcasters to curb the continual growth

in the number of RHB accreditations, bearing in mind the

increasing amounts of coverage that they are providing for the

Games.

4.04 Recommendation: Reduce the total number of press accreditations, including

photographers.

4.05 Recommendation: Limit the entourages of high-ranking guests.

4.06 Recommendation: No longer accept accompanying guests of WADA observers and

staff, as already done for the IOC Medical Commission.

4.7 Recommendation: Set quota for equipment technicians at Winter Games.

4.8 Recommendation: Review NOC support staff including Ao and P categories.



5 Recommendations>

>

5.5 Service LevelsThe term "service levels" is a generic expression used by the Commission to describe the

general levels of expectation that have built-up in relation to successive editions of the

Games. There is a tendency for host cities, Games organizers and stakeholders to

continuously improve upon services provided on the occasion of the Games and to showcase,

in order to stage "the best Games ever." This development and the comparison between

sports and sporting events have led to a "benchmark inflation" and thus to increased

expectations, services, facilities and costs.

Principle

Halt the ever-increasing "benchmark inflation" that arises from comparisons of

services provided at past Games or other major events. Service levels should be of a

reasonable standard and be adapted to each client groups real needs. Acceptable risk

levels must also be addressed with some key stakeholders.

Technology

5.01 Recommendation: Use combined video/score boards where possible, rather than

duplicating such items.

5.02 Recommendation: Reconsider necessity for the OCOG to provide all results on its own

website, and rely instead on sites of other providers, such as rights-

holders and IFs, with a link from the OCOG’s site to such other

sites. The IOC should make appropriate arrangements to have full

access to and use of all Olympic results. The technical elements of

this idea should be further studied.

5.03 Recommendation: OCOG websites should be functional and not include costly "nice-

to-have" entertainment features.

5.04 Recommendation: Avoid duplication of communication devices/means by reducing

the number of fixed phones, phone lines, mobile phones and

radios/handsets.



5 Recommendations>

>

Transportation

5.05 Recommendation: Other than as justified, change Chef de Mission and Deputy Chefs

de Mission’s privileges from T1 to T3.

5.06 Recommendation: Provide reasonable hours of T1 category service and rosters for

drivers. Many requests for extended service in the T1 category

result from personal entertainment.

5.07 Recommendation: For IOC members (other than IOC Executive Board), and NOC

presidents and secretaries general, start T1 services after the IOC

Session, while providing T3 services as required in the meantime.

5.08 Recommendation: Dedicated (T1) drivers should generally have the dual function of

driver and assistant.

5.09 Recommendation: Eliminate the T2 (dedicated car pool) transport category, changing

it to T3. This will require sufficient cars in the T3 pool and an

effective dispatching system, but will significantly reduce the

number of vehicles and staff required.

5.10 Recommendation: Streamline the T3 transportation service, using buses where

possible, instead of private vehicles. This would be effective for

PEL events and ceremonies.

5.11 Recommendation: Where there is a sufficient venue motor-pool of T3 cars, do not

allow T3 customers to demand that drivers wait for more than 15

minutes for a return trip, other than for certain remote venues. This

ties up vehicles and drivers that could be available for other

assignments.

5.12 Recommendation: Provide sound and reliable public transport systems to cut down on

use of private and other vehicles and need for parking.

5.13 Recommendation: Rationalize number, users and routes of Olympic Family vehicles

to reduce the number of vehicles, traffic control, special

load/unload zones at venues and parking zones.

5.14 Recommendation: Review, relative to the functioning of the T3 fleet and venue motor-

pool, the possibility of reducing ad hoc transport demands at venues

to reduce the number of required vehicles, drivers and dispatchers

assigned to venue motor pools.



5 Recommendations>

5.15 Recommendation: Rationalize and streamline the media transport system and make

better use of media bus/van fleet. The core services must allow

media coverage of the Games under satisfactory conditions. For

example, use vehicles smaller than recliner-coach buses on the

majority of routes; reduce airport-to-accommodation systems

where public taxi services are sufficient; and reduce frequency of

MPC/IBC-to-Olympic Village services. Other reductions must be

explored.

5.16 Recommendation: Eliminate airport transfers for T2 and T3 constituents, where

sufficient public transport exists.

5.17 Recommendation: Reduce costs associated with providing parking lots by charging for

spectator parking, thereby promoting use of public transport

(assuming financially favourable) and encouraging car sharing.

5.18 Recommendation: Plan Olympic Family transport system capacity on a demand basis,

rather than supply basis, to reduce excess and unused capacity.

5.19 Recommendation: Any service-level increases in transport must be approved by the

Coordination Commission, especially prior to the Games, including

the number of days prior to the Games that transport is provided,

transporting coaches to meetings and transporting officials between

venues.

5.20 Recommendation: Reduce dedicated parking for the Olympic Family, until medal

rounds, basing the amount of space on average usage at each venue

and making flexible arrangements, including alternate modes of

transport on high-occupancy days.

Media Services

5.21 Recommendation: Reduce the number of TV sets with Olympic cable TV (CATV - all

venue signals) in locations such as staff break areas, dining areas

and lounges.

5.22 Recommendation: Depending on the sport, availability and location of video boards,

reduce or eliminate TV monitors with CATV on press-tabled seats.

5.23 Recommendation: In media villages, provide TV sets with CATV in common areas

only, instead of in every room. Where such service is desired in an

individual room, this can become a rate card item to provide the

OCOG with cost recovery.



5 Recommendations>

5.24 Recommendation: OCOGs should be required to provide the traditional film/disk

transport system at the end of competition sessions only.

5.25 Recommendation: Provide remote access to INFO system and Commentators

Information System (CIS) if this can be done at a reasonable cost

and if OCOGs can recoup costs. This could potentially save a

significant number of media accreditations for people who could

work from their home base.

5.26 Recommendation: Consider reducing the scope of Games-time Olympic News

Services (ONS) and INFO features. This will significantly reduce

the number of volunteers required for the Games.

Accreditation

5.27 Recommendation: Continually examine accreditation entitlements to relate them as

much as possible to operational needs.

5.28 Recommendation: Review application of Prime Event Limitation (PEL) following the

Athens 2004 Olympic Games, to consider if appropriate categories

of accreditation were subject to PEL.

5.29 Recommendation: Contain growth in access to reserved seating by applying PEL when

necessary.

Documents and Translation

5.30 Recommendation: Distribution of paper copies (start lists, results, reviews, etc.) at

MPC and venues should be better defined to reduce the number of

media reports being printed, with many reports provided on-

demand only. Reductions of up to 25 percent can be made over

Sydney’s 10 million printed reports — saving over 2.5 million

printed reports, as well as reducing staff requirements and freeing

the printing centres for other work.

5.31 Recommendation: Reduce translation requirements to essential documents only.

5.32 Recommendation: Reassess the need for French INFO and French official website and

the need for a third language in the case of non-English-speaking

host countries.

5.33 Recommendation: Review the languages needed for simultaneous interpretation at the

MPC and other venues, based on further analysis.



5 Recommendations>

5.34 Recommendation: Increase the proportion of publications in electronic format and

eliminate printed versions where possible.

Food Services

5.35 Recommendation: Rationalize food services at Olympic Family Lounges. Hot meal or

buffet services at venues should not be the standard.

5.36 Recommendation: Food services should be streamlined. A centralized management

and sourcing should create synergies.

5.37 Recommendation: Fine-dining restaurants at the IBC and MPC should be dropped in

view of high costs and lack of usage.



5 Recommendations>

The scope of the work of the Commission has been ambitious, perhaps overly so, given the

time constraints and data requirements. During the process of our work, we concluded that

reliable cost figures were not available to make direct comparisons and to identify specific

savings in all cases. We have, however, relied on the recent experience of many experts and

have been able to estimate, with some degree of certainty, the possible cost savings that may

be derived from implementing many of the recommendations. These savings have been

identified in the attached Annex "A," which identifies in more detail each of the

recommendations and the related financial and organizational implications.

In the course of our work, we have concluded that the experience of each edition of the

Games should be analyzed to identify successful steps that have been taken to reduce costs

and to identify opportunities for further progress. This will involve an analysis of each

Games and permit the development of longitudinal studies of essential and non-essential

Games expenditures. The initial period of such studies should include the 2004 and 2006

Games, which the present Commission is willing to undertake, but, whether or not the

current Commission remains in existence, the Commission recommends that there be a

similarly constituted Commission established at the end of each Olympiad to review the

Games of that Olympiad and to make recommendations to the IOC Executive Board. Owing

to its essential "audit" nature, we would suggest that the Commission be separate from the

Evaluation and Coordination Commissions and not restricted solely to staff and outside

consultants or experts.



6 Conclusion>

We should like to thank the following people for their contribution to the work of the

Commission:

Olympic Games Study Commission - members

Mr Richard W. POUND Q.C., Chairman

Dr Rubén ACOSTA HERNANDEZ

Mr John COATES

Mr Robert CTVRTLIK

Mr Lamine DIACK

Mr Sinan ERDEM

Mr Bruno GRANDI

Mr Patrick HICKEY

Mr Gian-Franco KASPER

Mr Mustapha LARFAOUI

Mr Randhir SINGH

Mr Ching-Kuo WU

Participants of the Working Group meetings, December 2001

Mr Dimitris BEIS, Athens 2004

Professor Philippe BOVY, IOC transport expert

Mr Spyros CAPRALOS, Athens 2004

Mr Rémy CHARMETANT, Albertville 1992 and IOC Coordination Commission member

Mr Bob ELPHINSTON, Sydney 2000 and IOC expert

Mr Enrico FRASCARI, Turin 2006

Mr Patrick GLISSON, Atlanta 1996 and IOC expert

Mr Alexis ILIADIS, Athens 2004

Mr Sotiris KOUGIOUMTZOGLOU, Athens 2004

Mr Lluis MILLET, Barcelona 1992

Mr Tetsuo OYAMA, Nagano 1998

Mr Ferran PASTOR, Barcelona 1992 and IOC expert

Mr Segar REDDY, Sydney 2000

Mr David RICHMOND, Sydney 2000

Mr Paolo ROTA, Turin 2006



7 Acknowledgments>

Mr Jim SLOMAN, Sydney 2000

Mr Svend STRAND, Lillehammer 1994

Mr Phillip TULLY, Sydney 2000

Mr Wang WEI, Beijing 2008

Mr Shu’an YANG, Beijing 2008

Experts

Mr Jonathan ALFORD, transport

Mr Jerry ANDERSON, venues

Mr Luciano BARRA, general

Professor Philippe BOVY, transport

Mr Tom CISEWSKI, accreditation

Dr Paulin DJITE, languages

Mr Anthony EDGAR, publications and languages

Mr Bob ELPHINSTON, sport and venues

Mr Paul FOSTER, Olympic Family

Mr Xavier GONZALEZ, Paralympic Games

Ms Suzy GRIERSON, look

Ms Di HENRY, torch relay

Mr Rick LUDWIG, finance

Mr Richard PALFREYMAN, press

Mr Steve PARRY, press

Mr Jonathan PEPPER, languages

Mr Donald PRITCHARD, food services

Mr Manolo ROMERO, broadcasting

Mr Anthony SCANLON, human resources

Mr Hugo STEINEGGER, press

Mr Petter SYVERUD, finance

Mr Grant THOMAS, venues and transport

Mr Miquel TORRES, finance

Ms Patsy TRETHOWAN, medical services

Miscellaneous

BRAINBANK ("Public Suggestions")



7 Acknowledgments>

IOC Administration

We would like to thank all the IOC directors and members of the IOC administration whohelped with the Commission’s work. Special thanks go to the following people:

Mr Gilbert FELLI, Executive Director

Mr Philippe VERVEER

Mr Philippe FURRER

Mr Arno WOLTER

Dr Lisa HINDSON

Ms Nolvenn LAINE

Ms Emma FUSZARD



7 Acknowledgments>



> 8 Annexes



Venu

es a

nd F

acili

ties:

Max

imis

e te

mpo

rary

inst

alla

tion

s ov

erpe

rman

ent

cons

truc

tion

, esp

ecia

llyw

here

lega

cy r

equi

rem

ents

are

less

tha

n G

ames

req

uire

men

ts(2

.6)

IOC

bid

manual/

quest

ionnair

e a

nd I

OC

Venue G

uid

eli

nes

to a

dopt

pri

ncip

les:

I)

use

exis

ting v

enues

where

poss

ible

; ii

) if

legacy n

eed e

xis

ts,

buil

d n

ew

perm

anent

facil

ity;

iii)

if

no l

egacy n

eed e

xis

ts,

use

tem

pora

ry v

enue s

olu

tion.

Serv

ice

Leve

ls:

Red

uce

the

num

ber

of T

Vse

ts w

ith

CA

TV

(5.2

1-2

2-2

3)

The n

um

ber

of

monit

ors

wit

h C

AT

Vcan b

e c

ut

in a

reas

such a

s: s

taff

bre

ak a

reas,

din

ing a

reas

and

lounges.

Num

bers

can b

e r

educed i

n p

ress

sta

nds

for

som

e s

port

s. I

n M

edia

Vil

lages,

TV

sets

wit

h

CA

TV

may b

e a

vail

able

only

in c

om

mon a

reas

inst

ead o

f every

room

as

today.

Such a

serv

ice i

n e

ach

room

may b

ecom

e a

rate

card

ite

m.

Serv

ice

Leve

ls:

Red

uce

film

/dis

k tr

ansp

ort

syst

em(5

.24)

Wit

h t

he w

idesp

read u

se o

f dig

ital

photo

gra

phy,

anyone w

ork

ing t

o a

deadli

ne w

ork

s w

ith d

igit

al

and

sends

their

pic

ture

s fr

om

the v

enues

via

landli

nes

or

wir

ele

ss. A

s a c

onse

quence,

OC

OG

s sh

ould

be

requir

ed t

o t

ransp

ort

fil

ms/

dis

ks

only

once p

er

sess

ion,

at

its

clo

se.

Serv

ice

Leve

ls:

Set

quot

a fo

req

uipm

ent

tech

nici

ans

at W

inte

rG

ames

(4.7

)

Venu

es a

nd F

acili

ties:

Red

uce

cost

and

bui

ld-o

ut o

f O

lym

pic

Fam

ily L

oung

es w

hich

are

typ

ical

ly

size

d fo

rm

edal

rou

nds;

pla

n to

acc

omm

odat

e av

erag

e at

tend

ance

(2.2

9)

●C

ost

sa

vin

g

of

USD

21

m

illio

nto

const

ruct

tem

po

rary

fi

eld

h

ock

ey

v

en

ue

co

mp

are

d

to

perm

anent

(hypoth

eti

cal

exam

ple

).

T

ypic

all

y,

tem

pora

ry c

ost

is

30-5

0%

low

er

than p

erm

anent.

●C

om

ple

xit

y

●S

ize

●B

ase

d o

n n

um

bers

of

TV

sets

in S

alt

Lake C

ity

and A

thens,

a 1

0%

-20%

reducti

on w

ould

all

ow

a

cost

savin

g o

f:

- W

inte

r: U

SD 2

50,0

00 t

o 50

0,00

0-

Sum

mer:

USD

900

,000

to

1,80

0,00

0●

Com

ple

xit

y

●S

ize

●B

ase

d

on

th

e

Sy

dn

ey

b

ud

get

for

film

/dis

k

transp

ort

sy

stem

of

about

US

D

700,0

00,

it

is

est

imate

d t

hat

USD

500

,000

can n

ow

be s

aved.

●C

om

ple

xit

y

●S

ize

●C

ost

sav

ing U

SD 2

,070

per

pers

on n

ot

att

endin

g

●C

om

ple

xit

y

●S

ize

●C

ost

savin

g o

f U

SD 1

0-15

,000

per

venue b

ase

d

on

S

alt

L

ak

e

Cit

y

co

sts

for

a

10

-15

%

size

reducti

on.

●C

om

ple

xit

y n

eutr

al

●S

ize

Idea

Tit

le a

nd S

umm

ary

Impa

ct

Ann

ex 1

: Rec

omm

enda

tion

(S

ampl

e)O

lym

pic

Gam

es S

tudy

Com

mis

sion

Annex ASample of summary version of recommendations

Maximize temporary installation over permanent construction especiallywhere legacy requirements are lower than Games requirements

● Olympic Games requirements for many sports are typically far greater than a

city’s legacy requirements.

● Temporary commodities are available in sufficient quantity and quality to use

for venues or enhancement of venues.

● Bid and host cities tend to select permanent solutions for competition and

training venues in their quest to satisfy IFs and be selected to host the Olympic

Games.

● IOC should define in its IOC Venue Guidelines (under development) the

following principles for venue selection:

- Use existing venues, with refurbishment as required.

- If there is a legacy need for a specific sports venue, select a permanent

solution, with a design that allows varying capacities.

- If there is no legacy need, select a temporary solution.

● IOC, in conjunction with IFs, to list in which sports temporary venues

would be acceptable (in cases where there is no existing venue or where legacy

needs do not apply).

● Following the principles:

- Maximizes use of existing venues.

- Supports new permanent construction only if there is a legacy need, thereby

avoiding "white elephants".

- Promotes and accepts temporary solutions for Games needs.

- Supports the concept of sustainable development.

● Temporary construction is significantly cheaper than permanent.

● Minimizes issues with permanent construction — venue owners/operators and

governments.

● Schedule benefits thanks to shorter construction installation period for

temporary facilities.

● Ongoing maintenance costs for permanent venues would be reduced.

● Temporary structures can be re-used for other purposes in other locations over a

long period of time.

● Temporary methodology maximizes opportunity to match seating requirements

to ticket revenue potential.



Annex BSample of a detailed recommendation sheet

TITLE

DESCRIPTION

POTENTIALBENEFITS

THEME 3: Venues and Facilities

IDEA No. 2.6

Temporary construction represents 30-50% of the cost of permanent construction.

Some examples are:

● Hypothetical cost analysis for field hockey venue:

● Permanent: USD 32,500,000

● Temporary: USD 11,180,000

● Buildings (USD 87-110/sq ft) vs. tents (USD 17/sq ft)

● Toilets (USD 200/sq ft) vs. portaloos (USD 6-12/sq ft)

● Permanent stand seating (USD 200-240/seat) vs. temporary stands (USD 60-

175/seat)

● Buildings (USD 87-110/sq ft) vs. trailers (USD 30/sq ft)

● Locker rooms (USD 150/sq ft) vs. trailer locker rooms (USD 30/sq ft)

● Building (USD 87-110/sq ft) vs. rental (USD 1.45/sq ft)

● Sydney 2000 Beach Volleyball temporary venue cost AUD 11 million, compared

with projected cost of AUD 25 million for a permanent venue.

Maintenance and operating costs would be eliminated. Examples of two Salt Lake

City venues annual operating/maintenance costs are:

● Utah Olympic Park USD 3,370,000

● Utah Olympic Oval USD 2,760,000

Re-use of temporary structures allows cost to be amortized over the period of use.

● A supplier re-used equipment from Sydney for Salt Lake, saving approximately

50%.

Supply market for temporary commodities is still limited in some areas.

● Include principles in IOC Venue Guidelines, IOC Applicant and Candidate City

Manuals.

● Evaluation criteria for selection of Applicant and Candidate cities to weigh

legacy use appropriately.

● Operational feasibility: high

● Political feasibility: medium

● IOC Venue Guidelines — Games Operations Department to coordinate

● IOC Applicant and Candidate City Manuals — Candidate City Relations to

coordinate

● IF Requirements — Sport and IF Relations to coordinate.

● IOC Evaluation Commissions to apply principles.

Authors: Lisa Hindson, Jerry Anderson, Bob Elphinston



Annex BSample of a detailed recommendation sheet

POTENTIAL RISKS

IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIONS REQUIREDBY IOC

INFO SOURCE /AUTHOR OF IDEA

FINANCIAL BENEFIT

International Olympic Committee

ChAteau de VidyC. P. 356

CH – 1007 Lausanne / SuisseTEl. (41.21) 621 61 11Fax (41.21) 621 62 16

www.olympic.org